Amazing interview, love to see people like David working so efficiently and enthusiastically towards great future of humanity. Thank you Age of Miracles for providing us with this great converstation!
He said things like "we're generating electricity" I would have like to know what kind of Q values they're getting. And what's the ratio of input electricity to output electricity?
The machine they let you see... Well, that has no power generation tech in it. That machine is just way too small. Their 7th prototype is allegedly 25% bigger, but I heard they're running into thermal neutron issues, which is actually not good at all, because that's going to make all their equipment into radioactive isotopes
@@kayakMike1000 The D-D reaction could generate neutron, and as long as they use D-3He as the fuel, they could not avoid the side reactions. What's more, more frequent pulse will generate more heat and ultimately make their current design a problem. I heard they also proposed to cool the who thing with water and that will increase their overall efficiency. But my feeling is that fission is simple to take the boiling water strategy, but look at the fusion design, it is too complicated and too delicate to have the boiling water design. If they can use 3He-3He reaction, they can avoid the problem of neutrons, but they will have lower output and should need higher temperature to make it work.
@@kayakMike1000 They need D-D reactions because that is how they make the He3. D+D => He3 + n or T + p. The Tritium eventually also decays into more He3 (but that would be a while). Depending on how much He3 from T- decay they have, they will need between 1 and 2 D-D reactions per D-He3 reaction (in a machine that does both He3 breeding and D-He3 fusion). So at most you have one neutron per 3 reactions. That neutron also "only" has 2.45 MeV of energy compared to the 14 MeV from D-T reactions. That is a lot more benign and they have a lot more choices for materials. E.g. the silicon they use in the first wall needs to absorb 3 D-D neutrons before it becomes unstable and then only has a half life of ~2.5 hours. The aluminum in the magnets has a half life of 2.5 minutes. Those isotopes are going to be cold in no time.
D-D reactions occur at a lower energy input than D-He3 and emit high energy neutrons that must be shielded against to protect equipment and humans in the vicinity. Both D-D and D-He3 reactions will be produced in the method described here, however the neutron energy is ignored . What is to be done about this wasted energy, excess heat, required shielding, and what that shielding does to the overall efficiency and viability of the system? They need to show a plan for handling the neutron problem, neutrons can not be manipulated with electric or magnetic force.
He talked about this thing in his other talk. What he suggested was to have a completely differently facility specifically to do D-D to produce He3. This facility would take care of those concerns and the main D-He3 reactor will be in a different location. I agree, certainly a problem.
They need D-D reactions because that is how they make the He3. D+D => He3 + n or T + p. The Tritium eventually also decays into more He3 (but that would be a while). Depending on how much He3 from T- decay they have, they will need between 1 and 2 D-D reactions per D-He3 reaction (in a machine that does both He3 breeding and D-He3 fusion). So at most you have one neutron per 3 reactions. That neutron also "only" has 2.45 MeV of energy compared to the 14 MeV from D-T reactions. That is a lot more benign and they have a lot more choices for materials. E.g. the silicon they use in the first wall needs to absorb 3 D-D neutrons before it becomes unstable and then only has a half life of ~2.5 hours. The aluminum in the magnets has a half life of 2.5 minutes. The energy from neutrons only makes about 5% of the total energy released. It is not really worth building a whole steam plant around that.
Solar power is a non-solution. The panels get cracked or broke or clouded and they stop working well. Clearing habitat to build large solar farms is eco-lun@cy. The only location it makes any sense to put up panels is locations with a lot of sun on the roofs of existing structures where there is limited damaging weather. Wind-power is an ecological catastrophe. The blade-assemblies wear out in less than a decade and if we generated base-load with wind we would generate more h2zardous w@ste every year (fiber-glass c@uses c@ncer like @sbestos) than the current global total waste production. It's so much waste the only thing we could do with it all is burn it. It is important to note how over-blown CO2 is but we can't emit it for forever so the only options are fission or fusion..
The goal is to eventually get the cost down to 1 cent/kWh, way below the total system cost of solar + batteries (not even factoring in the grid costs). Plus, their machines can act as partners for solar since they can start up and shut down at a moments notice. So, they can effectively replace batteries with something that will actually generate electricity and not just store it.
I still think there is more study to be done with bifilar transformers containing magnets to find the correct resonant frequency for more power out then power in. I have seen it on a scope that extracting power from magnets is possible Pacific frequencies and coil arrangements in transformers
Further to my point about D-D reactions giving tritium as well as helium3, one must then expect the easier reaction between deuterium and tritium to take place. This will give 14 MeV neutrons and will add some nasty complications to the system.
Nope! The Tritium is too hot and non- collisional on the timescale of the pulse. It gets extracted along with the other fusion products between each pulse. There would be very, very few (negligible) D-T reactions.
For 5 years the Eirex Technology in Canada has discovered the powerful forces of cavitation and any type of water or contaminated waste plastic is ideal besides oil with poor utility.
Cavitation can break the water molecules without energy intensive electrolysis of water. Any type of salt, polluted or pond water can be utilized to produce the lowest cost hydrogen gaseous fuel is what Eirex Tech in Canada has discovered.
His D-D reaction to give He3 also produces tritium. I have not seen this discussed but dealing with the tritium might not be easy. It is fairly nasty from the radiological point of view and I gather not easy to handle - none must be allowed to escape.
@@johnh6245 Meh, compare the Tritium limits in drinking water between Australia and the US and you can clearly see that most of this is BS. Tritium has to be handled carefully but it is nowhere near as dangerous as it is portrayed. There are only two cases of people dying from Tritium exposure in all of history and this is not 100% certain but the result of a study way after the fact. These two people (Russians) were purposely poisoned with Tritiated water.
Some questions: A) what is the cost per mwhr of the fuel, esp tritium/helium 3? B) tritium, very similar, is naturally produced in Canada's heavy water fission reactors. Is that the plan initially?
The real cost would be the cost of deuterium, since Helion plans to breed their helium 3 from it, and tritium can also be bred from deuterium - deuterium fusion reactions. So basically their only real feul source is deuterium, which is readily abundant in see water (it makes up a third of it).
@@lengould9262 Correct, but still extremely abundant and very low cost (even today without a real industry built around it). Heavy water FISSION reactors have entire pools filled with this stuff and a 50 MWe Helion power plant would only need about 20 kg of Deuterium a year.
The correct question is can mankind survive climate change with any quality of living without nuclear energy (fission & fusion) in a timely fashion. The answer is NO! We will never get close to where we need to go in the time frame we have to get there, without nuclear (fission & fusion). The solar+batteries at $/KwH is an inadequate analytic framework of the climate change challenge. The clock is ticking and the S is hitting the fan at an accelerating rate. Mankind must have a balls to the wall nuclear build out, with urgency.
Well, those human pests seemed to do very well during the Roman Climate Optimum and Medieval Warm period. During that time, there was a longer growing season and with warmth, the air carried more water in the planetary hydrological cycle. Much of that planet surface is also covered in water that contained significant amounts of dissolved CO2 that was also able to escape the natural warmed oceans. This caused a slight bump in atmospheric CO2 that aided humans with their primitive agriculture technologies. So... Historically, humans will probably thrive on a warmer earth. The are, after all, a tropical primate species that has adapted well to colder climates, but often return to tropical regions in their older ages
@@kayakMike1000 Fallacious argumentation based on an inapplicable comparison. Either your intent, or you are ignorant of the fact. Look deeper at the many differences in the situations.
If you review the real math we have hundreds of years to make the transition but it's going to happen this century. Waste-stream is our biggest environment issue.
What we have in this channel are people who have chosen to maintain an optimistic outlook no matter how dire the warnings become. They deliberately choose to immerse themselves in echo chamber stories that reinforce what they crave believing in. The world is filled with opportunists and many find joy, and success, in capitalizing upon the increasing cravings for hope for the future.
@@Manosdepiedra1979 - I prefer watching as billions of people bring forth innocent offspring into a world that will soon likely turn to hell for them. The parents are driven by their personal cravings rather than the dire warnings that keep impeding upon their lives. Since everyone seems to be caught up in the same process they know that they must be right.
@@vernonbrechin4207 That "Insane Cravings" you call it is what pushed humanity to new heights and new standards of living that our ancestors could only have dreamed off. It's the same craving that will save humanity and if you want a prime example of this. You should look to countries in the east like China. It's a industrial powerhouse and It still managed to slash down its impact massively despite increases in demand and it will do so. This is not some insurmountable challenge that humanity can't handle. It's disgraceful that people think it is and it's even sadder that this wave of cynicism is emerging from the West specially given the region's tremendous achievements in the past. I say this as an immigrant. Degrowth will do nothing for the people in the West other than accelerate its demise.
@@vernonbrechin4207 I have a son. I do everything, I can to prepare him for life and to give him a head start. That is all a parent can ever do. But, I am also old enough to know what my grandparents and even my parents went through. It is stuff people who grew up in the US can never understand or even imagine: Kids playing in rubble and bomb craters with discarded weapons and duds everywhere. Even I still went skiing and (actually) enjoyed using bomb craters for jumping and stunts. People today have no idea how bad things were even 80 years ago. The average human is living a MUCH better life today than anyone did even 30 years ago. They are eating better, healthier and cleaner food. They work fewer hours. They enjoy technology that even my parents would be science fiction for centuries to come. And... yes climate change is bad. I agree with that. BUT, we have technology to mitigate the effects (or even reverse it) that is beyond the imagination of people 30 years ago. I believe that humanity can overcome any challenge and prosper at the same time. This stupid, pointless doom and gloom helps no one. It does not make anything better. It just is the self-pity and weakness of those propagating it (and applauding themselves for it). You are not helping anything. You are not contributing towards improving the future. You are worthless. You are useless. Just go and play dinosaur already and die out! We don't need you! You will be dead and forgotten in a generation from now. Meanwhile the children of this generation will live on. Some will die earlier. Some will live longer. It is hard to predict. I myself know that I won't live forever. I know that my time here is very limited. But I can prepare my offspring for the future as much as possible. I can give them values and knowledge (limited as it may be) and try to give them a head start by providing them with a good education. That requires personal sacrifice. Yeah, I could spend more time partying and enjoying (pointless) leisure. So what? On the grander scale, me and my personal pleasure are irrelevant. What will live on is my children and their children. Just like every single generation did since the very first self-replicating DNA molecule. That is the key to eternity. Everything else is essentially Ozymandias, irrelevant, forgotten, buried in the sand of time.
Billions of people have chosen not to closely follow the detailed trends with Anthropogenic Climate Disruption (ACD) because it is too depressing. The U.S. president was provided the first climate change report in 1965. That is likely at least two decades before you were born. Most people have come to assume that all the technological advances we have made since then are making a significant difference. Green marketing has played a role in that impression. The simple fact is that the greenhouse gas atmospheric concentrations keep climbing rapidly and within two decades the global average temperature is likely to exceed the catastrophic level of 2.0 °C where multiple positive feedback effects will prevent any chance of recovery. Most people assume our technology will save us, that threshold tipping points don’t exist and that it will never be too late for humans to reverse the deadly trend. All promoters of nuclear energy are in line with the vast majority of the Earth’s 8.0+ billion humans who have masterfully excluded the following warnings from their consciousness. They continue to assume that we have at least 20 years left to turn this ‘Titanic’ around, through the use of their favorite technology. I urge readers to search for the following two article titles. IPCC report: ‘now or never’ if world is to stave off climate disaster (TheGuardian) UN chief: World has less than 2 years to avoid 'runaway climate change' (TheHill) * This statement was made 5.8 years ago.
Because of high risk of war and human race not changing for any better very soon(10000y) small size fusion reactors are way the leaders will go. Small local fusion reactors simpily in terms of national security is the only correct solution.
This pipe dream never burns out. In ten years, if David is still around, no one will even remember this company other than as a foot note. Listen to speculation treated as fact. Even worse is describing all the wonderous possibilities of a fusion reactor even before you have one. Lots of natural processes generate fusion. None of which are commercial. All this talk excites investors, but non of this will turn on a light bulb. Just because you can imagine a world powered by fusion, does not mean it's a real possibility. Half a century of research by brilliant engineers and scientists and hundreds of billions spent have turned up nothing that remotely dovetails with the statements in this videos.
You’re not getting energy from nowhere. You are getting it from the lost mass, as the outputs are lighter than the inputs. E=MC^2, thermodynamics isn’t violated
Hi voltage power lines to transfer the electrons around the country or better yet the world from wind/solar/battery(WSB) sources is a far more likely to happen scenario than fusion. fusion is still a process that needs major breakthroughs in the future and it may or may never happen. Hi voltage transmission combined with WSB can be implemented now now breakthroughs required for baseline energy needs. Local solar/battery at individual homes and larger scale community WSB projects can replace the Peaker demand now supplied by fossil burning plants. If fusion is ever a viable source of electricity and if fusion can compete with the ever decreasing total cost of energy that WSB we can add that to the grid sources, one of the main reasons that the fusion industry is being bankrolled is so that the fossil fuel industry can continue to slow the replacement of fossil fuel generated electricity by WSB.
@@elmarmoelzer2229- Despite the Trenta being Helion’s 6th generation machine that has performed about 20,000 experimental pulses they still haven’t demonstrated that any one of those shots achieved even one watt of fusion energy. Nor have they demonstrated any production of helium-3, tritium , or any other fusion byproducts. Typically nuclear fusion energy fans have no interest in probing behind such slick promotional pitches.
@@vernonbrechin4207 1. The exact results of Trenta are not public but their investors had them peer reviewed by reviewers from Sandia, Los Alamos and Reno, etc, etc before they handed out the big bucks for Polaris. The fact that they handed out 500 million (with another 1.7 billion to go if Helion meets their milestones), should be telling. 2. That is - once again - complete BS. Helion extracts and examines the fusion products from their machines between pulses. The composition of the fusion products is a great data point (among many) to confirm your results. Results from a single diagnostic point, no matter how sophisticated, can be mistaken and misinterpreted. It is the big picture of multiple data points that is important. And the fusion products are one important data point. If you think you have been getting somewhere in the 10^20ies of D-D fusion reactions per pulse and you can not find the fusion products to match that estimate, you have a serious problem!
As a model Y owner I think ICE cars don't make sense. The idea of going to a gas station and paying $50 per week more than the cost of electricity, Is it true you have to take an ICE car and have the oil changes twice a year and pay another $50 Is it true you have to get your brakes changed every 30,000 miles? Is it true that the fuel you put in your car is one of the main causes of war that over the last 100 years and those wars have killed hundreds of thousands of people? is it true that millions of barrels of oil have been spilled into the ocean?
![State of Flex Webinar [Dec 2024]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z07exBuGUs0/mqdefault.jpg)
Amazing interview, love to see people like David working so efficiently and enthusiastically towards great future of humanity. Thank you Age of Miracles for providing us with this great converstation!
He said things like "we're generating electricity" I would have like to know what kind of Q values they're getting. And what's the ratio of input electricity to output electricity?
The machine they let you see... Well, that has no power generation tech in it. That machine is just way too small. Their 7th prototype is allegedly 25% bigger, but I heard they're running into thermal neutron issues, which is actually not good at all, because that's going to make all their equipment into radioactive isotopes
They were at 0.95 a year ago.
@@kayakMike1000 The D-D reaction could generate neutron, and as long as they use D-3He as the fuel, they could not avoid the side reactions. What's more, more frequent pulse will generate more heat and ultimately make their current design a problem. I heard they also proposed to cool the who thing with water and that will increase their overall efficiency. But my feeling is that fission is simple to take the boiling water strategy, but look at the fusion design, it is too complicated and too delicate to have the boiling water design. If they can use 3He-3He reaction, they can avoid the problem of neutrons, but they will have lower output and should need higher temperature to make it work.
@@kayakMike1000 They need D-D reactions because that is how they make the He3. D+D => He3 + n or T + p. The Tritium eventually also decays into more He3 (but that would be a while). Depending on how much He3 from T- decay they have, they will need between 1 and 2 D-D reactions per D-He3 reaction (in a machine that does both He3 breeding and D-He3 fusion). So at most you have one neutron per 3 reactions. That neutron also "only" has 2.45 MeV of energy compared to the 14 MeV from D-T reactions. That is a lot more benign and they have a lot more choices for materials. E.g. the silicon they use in the first wall needs to absorb 3 D-D neutrons before it becomes unstable and then only has a half life of ~2.5 hours. The aluminum in the magnets has a half life of 2.5 minutes. Those isotopes are going to be cold in no time.
D-D reactions occur at a lower energy input than D-He3 and emit high energy neutrons that must be shielded against to protect equipment and humans in the vicinity.
Both D-D and D-He3 reactions will be produced in the method described here, however the neutron energy is ignored .
What is to be done about this wasted energy, excess heat, required shielding, and what that shielding does to the overall efficiency and viability of the system?
They need to show a plan for handling the neutron problem, neutrons can not be manipulated with electric or magnetic force.
He talked about this thing in his other talk. What he suggested was to have a completely differently facility specifically to do D-D to produce He3. This facility would take care of those concerns and the main D-He3 reactor will be in a different location. I agree, certainly a problem.
They need D-D reactions because that is how they make the He3. D+D => He3 + n or T + p. The Tritium eventually also decays into more He3 (but that would be a while). Depending on how much He3 from T- decay they have, they will need between 1 and 2 D-D reactions per D-He3 reaction (in a machine that does both He3 breeding and D-He3 fusion). So at most you have one neutron per 3 reactions. That neutron also "only" has 2.45 MeV of energy compared to the 14 MeV from D-T reactions. That is a lot more benign and they have a lot more choices for materials. E.g. the silicon they use in the first wall needs to absorb 3 D-D neutrons before it becomes unstable and then only has a half life of ~2.5 hours. The aluminum in the magnets has a half life of 2.5 minutes.
The energy from neutrons only makes about 5% of the total energy released. It is not really worth building a whole steam plant around that.
There’s going to be tons of heat as a byproduct. Will there be any heat capture?
Don't you mean that most of the energy is released an high energy neutrons?
Actually much of the energy does come from neutrons andi sexpressed as heat and damaging radiation .
This is not acknowledged by this company.
isn,t the heat used for energy creation , so that there is no waste or byproduct , ?
@@riderpaul 1/3 of the reactions will be 2.45 MeV neutrons. That makes about 5% of the total energy released by the machine.
What types of machine degradation are envisaged and over what time scale could events happen?
How will it compete with solar+batteries at $/KwH?
Solar power is a non-solution. The panels get cracked or broke or clouded and they stop working well. Clearing habitat to build large solar farms is eco-lun@cy.
The only location it makes any sense to put up panels is locations with a lot of sun on the roofs of existing structures where there is limited damaging weather.
Wind-power is an ecological catastrophe. The blade-assemblies wear out in less than a decade and if we generated base-load with wind we would generate more h2zardous w@ste every year (fiber-glass c@uses c@ncer like @sbestos) than the current global total waste production. It's so much waste the only thing we could do with it all is burn it.
It is important to note how over-blown CO2 is but we can't emit it for forever so the only options are fission or fusion..
The goal is to eventually get the cost down to 1 cent/kWh, way below the total system cost of solar + batteries (not even factoring in the grid costs). Plus, their machines can act as partners for solar since they can start up and shut down at a moments notice. So, they can effectively replace batteries with something that will actually generate electricity and not just store it.
What is 50 MW? Is it consumes or generates , electricity or heat?
Their goal for their standard machines is 50 MWe. That means 40 MW electric output.
I still think there is more study to be done with bifilar transformers containing magnets to find the correct resonant frequency for more power out then power in. I have seen it on a scope that extracting power from magnets is possible Pacific frequencies and coil arrangements in transformers
If anyone shows you something that has more power out than power in, it's fake.
Further to my point about D-D reactions giving tritium as well as helium3, one must then expect the easier reaction between deuterium and tritium to take place. This will give 14 MeV neutrons and will add some nasty complications to the system.
Nope! The Tritium is too hot and non- collisional on the timescale of the pulse. It gets extracted along with the other fusion products between each pulse. There would be very, very few (negligible) D-T reactions.
For 5 years the Eirex Technology in Canada has discovered the powerful forces of cavitation and any type of water or contaminated waste plastic is ideal besides oil with poor utility.
Cavitation can break the water molecules without energy intensive electrolysis of water. Any type of salt, polluted or pond water can be utilized to produce the lowest cost hydrogen gaseous fuel is what Eirex Tech in Canada has discovered.
His D-D reaction to give He3 also produces tritium. I have not seen this discussed but dealing with the tritium might not be easy. It is fairly nasty from the radiological point of view and I gather not easy to handle - none must be allowed to escape.
I believe it's the weakest beta emitter of all with a short biological residence, it's only a public relations risk
@@CanucklugNuclear regulators take tritium fairly seriously and they are more concerned with safety rather than public opinion.
@@johnh6245 Meh, compare the Tritium limits in drinking water between Australia and the US and you can clearly see that most of this is BS. Tritium has to be handled carefully but it is nowhere near as dangerous as it is portrayed. There are only two cases of people dying from Tritium exposure in all of history and this is not 100% certain but the result of a study way after the fact. These two people (Russians) were purposely poisoned with Tritiated water.
Julia's top looks like a CRT image with a noisy horizontal drive.
Some questions:
A) what is the cost per mwhr of the fuel, esp tritium/helium 3?
B) tritium, very similar, is naturally produced in Canada's heavy water fission reactors. Is that the plan initially?
The real cost would be the cost of deuterium, since Helion plans to breed their helium 3 from it, and tritium can also be bred from deuterium - deuterium fusion reactions. So basically their only real feul source is deuterium, which is readily abundant in see water (it makes up a third of it).
@justiceifeme Definitely not 1/3 of natural water, only 1/6,400 th . Still considered common and low cost.
@@lengould9262 Correct, but still extremely abundant and very low cost (even today without a real industry built around it). Heavy water FISSION reactors have entire pools filled with this stuff and a 50 MWe Helion power plant would only need about 20 kg of Deuterium a year.
Save Our Planet Now!
The correct question is can mankind survive climate change with any quality of living without nuclear energy (fission & fusion) in a timely fashion. The answer is NO! We will never get close to where we need to go in the time frame we have to get there, without nuclear (fission & fusion). The solar+batteries at $/KwH is an inadequate analytic framework of the climate change challenge. The clock is ticking and the S is hitting the fan at an accelerating rate. Mankind must have a balls to the wall nuclear build out, with urgency.
You fission lobby victims are such programmed half wits.
Most people just don't grasp how much energy we are talking about.
Well, those human pests seemed to do very well during the Roman Climate Optimum and Medieval Warm period. During that time, there was a longer growing season and with warmth, the air carried more water in the planetary hydrological cycle. Much of that planet surface is also covered in water that contained significant amounts of dissolved CO2 that was also able to escape the natural warmed oceans. This caused a slight bump in atmospheric CO2 that aided humans with their primitive agriculture technologies.
So... Historically, humans will probably thrive on a warmer earth. The are, after all, a tropical primate species that has adapted well to colder climates, but often return to tropical regions in their older ages
@@kayakMike1000 Fallacious argumentation based on an inapplicable comparison. Either your intent, or you are ignorant of the fact. Look deeper at the many differences in the situations.
If you review the real math we have hundreds of years to make the transition but it's going to happen this century. Waste-stream is our biggest environment issue.
I really hope they can get this to work, but I doubt they ever will.
I REALLY hope
that HELION, can get their FUSION generator
to WORK !!!
What we have in this channel are people who have chosen to maintain an optimistic outlook no matter how dire the warnings become. They deliberately choose to immerse themselves in echo chamber stories that reinforce what they crave believing in. The world is filled with opportunists and many find joy, and success, in capitalizing upon the increasing cravings for hope for the future.
Your right, you should prove them wrong by finding the nearest high rise. Degrowth must start at the home.
@@Manosdepiedra1979 - I prefer watching as billions of people bring forth innocent offspring into a world that will soon likely turn to hell for them. The parents are driven by their personal cravings rather than the dire warnings that keep impeding upon their lives. Since everyone seems to be caught up in the same process they know that they must be right.
@@vernonbrechin4207 That "Insane Cravings" you call it is what pushed humanity to new heights and new standards of living that our ancestors could only have dreamed off. It's the same craving that will save humanity and if you want a prime example of this. You should look to countries in the east like China. It's a industrial powerhouse and It still managed to slash down its impact massively despite increases in demand and it will do so. This is not some insurmountable challenge that humanity can't handle. It's disgraceful that people think it is and it's even sadder that this wave of cynicism is emerging from the West specially given the region's tremendous achievements in the past. I say this as an immigrant. Degrowth will do nothing for the people in the West other than accelerate its demise.
@@vernonbrechin4207 I have a son. I do everything, I can to prepare him for life and to give him a head start. That is all a parent can ever do. But, I am also old enough to know what my grandparents and even my parents went through. It is stuff people who grew up in the US can never understand or even imagine:
Kids playing in rubble and bomb craters with discarded weapons and duds everywhere. Even I still went skiing and (actually) enjoyed using bomb craters for jumping and stunts.
People today have no idea how bad things were even 80 years ago. The average human is living a MUCH better life today than anyone did even 30 years ago.
They are eating better, healthier and cleaner food. They work fewer hours. They enjoy technology that even my parents would be science fiction for centuries to come.
And... yes climate change is bad. I agree with that. BUT, we have technology to mitigate the effects (or even reverse it) that is beyond the imagination of people 30 years ago.
I believe that humanity can overcome any challenge and prosper at the same time. This stupid, pointless doom and gloom helps no one. It does not make anything better. It just is the self-pity and weakness of those propagating it (and applauding themselves for it). You are not helping anything. You are not contributing towards improving the future. You are worthless. You are useless. Just go and play dinosaur already and die out! We don't need you! You will be dead and forgotten in a generation from now.
Meanwhile the children of this generation will live on. Some will die earlier. Some will live longer. It is hard to predict.
I myself know that I won't live forever. I know that my time here is very limited. But I can prepare my offspring for the future as much as possible. I can give them values and knowledge (limited as it may be) and try to give them a head start by providing them with a good education.
That requires personal sacrifice. Yeah, I could spend more time partying and enjoying (pointless) leisure. So what? On the grander scale, me and my personal pleasure are irrelevant. What will live on is my children and their children. Just like every single generation did since the very first self-replicating DNA molecule. That is the key to eternity. Everything else is essentially Ozymandias, irrelevant, forgotten, buried in the sand of time.
Billions of people have chosen not to closely follow the detailed trends with Anthropogenic Climate Disruption (ACD) because it is too depressing. The U.S. president was provided the first climate change report in 1965. That is likely at least two decades before you were born. Most people have come to assume that all the technological advances we have made since then are making a significant difference. Green marketing has played a role in that impression. The simple fact is that the greenhouse gas atmospheric concentrations keep climbing rapidly and within two decades the global average temperature is likely to exceed the catastrophic level of 2.0 °C where multiple positive feedback effects will prevent any chance of recovery. Most people assume our technology will save us, that threshold tipping points don’t exist and that it will never be too late for humans to reverse the deadly trend.
All promoters of nuclear energy are in line with the vast majority of the Earth’s 8.0+ billion humans who have masterfully excluded the following warnings from their consciousness. They continue to assume that we have at least 20 years left to turn this ‘Titanic’ around, through the use of their favorite technology. I urge readers to search for the following two article titles.
IPCC report: ‘now or never’ if world is to stave off climate disaster (TheGuardian)
UN chief: World has less than 2 years to avoid 'runaway climate change' (TheHill)
* This statement was made 5.8 years ago.
CO2 is plant food, the plants grew and were geologically made into carbon fuels.
Because of high risk of war and human race not changing for any better very soon(10000y) small size fusion reactors are way the leaders will go. Small local fusion reactors simpily in terms of national security is the only correct solution.
Much easier and cheaper to scale up the joule thief demonstrated by steven jones.
light weight waffle
This pipe dream never burns out. In ten years, if David is still around, no one will even remember this company other than as a foot note.
Listen to speculation treated as fact. Even worse is describing all the wonderous possibilities of a fusion reactor even before you have one. Lots of natural processes generate fusion. None of which are commercial. All this talk excites investors, but non of this will turn on a light bulb. Just because you can imagine a world powered by fusion, does not mean it's a real possibility. Half a century of research by brilliant engineers and scientists and hundreds of billions spent have turned up nothing that remotely dovetails with the statements in this videos.
Helion has been around for more than 10 years already. In fact, they started in 2009 as a door name for MSNW LLC.
omg again with this scam....... YOU'RE HARMING THE REST OF THE FUSION COMMUNITY DAVID I HOPE YOU'RE READING THIS
Scam. They intend to produce tritium commercially and it will consume power, not make it.
What generating electricity directly takes is violating the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. It won't work. :-)
You’re not getting energy from nowhere. You are getting it from the lost mass, as the outputs are lighter than the inputs. E=MC^2, thermodynamics isn’t violated
Earth will be almost carbon neautral come 2035, hopefully fusion is cheaper than Solar some day
Earth will be using more fossil fuels in 2035 than it does today.
Hi voltage power lines to transfer the electrons around the country or better yet the world from wind/solar/battery(WSB) sources is a far more likely to happen scenario than fusion. fusion is still a process that needs major breakthroughs in the future and it may or may never happen. Hi voltage transmission combined with WSB can be implemented now now breakthroughs required for baseline energy needs. Local solar/battery at individual homes and larger scale community WSB projects can replace the Peaker demand now supplied by fossil burning plants.
If fusion is ever a viable source of electricity and if fusion can compete with the ever decreasing total cost of energy that WSB we can add that to the grid sources, one of the main reasons that the fusion industry is being bankrolled is so that the fossil fuel industry can continue to slow the replacement of fossil fuel generated electricity by WSB.
Fossil fuels: LOL. Get a more appropriate name. Plants grow with carbon. LOL.
Fusion in 2053. MAYBE
The first Helion power-producing reactor will built by 2028.
@@shannonbarber6161 I hope so. Best wishes
There's nothing that fusion promises for some magical future that fission can't provide today.
This guys either a liar or delusional
I don’t believe anyone in this video has ever built anything.
Helion built 6 ever larger prototypes so far. Their last one, Trenta was the first private fusion effort to reach 100 million degrees C.
@@elmarmoelzer2229- Despite the Trenta being Helion’s 6th generation machine that has performed about 20,000 experimental pulses they still haven’t demonstrated that any one of those shots achieved even one watt of fusion energy. Nor have they demonstrated any production of helium-3, tritium , or any other fusion byproducts.
Typically nuclear fusion energy fans have no interest in probing behind such slick promotional pitches.
@@vernonbrechin4207
1. The exact results of Trenta are not public but their investors had them peer reviewed by reviewers from Sandia, Los Alamos and Reno, etc, etc before they handed out the big bucks for Polaris. The fact that they handed out 500 million (with another 1.7 billion to go if Helion meets their milestones), should be telling.
2. That is - once again - complete BS.
Helion extracts and examines the fusion products from their machines between pulses. The composition of the fusion products is a great data point (among many) to confirm your results. Results from a single diagnostic point, no matter how sophisticated, can be mistaken and misinterpreted. It is the big picture of multiple data points that is important. And the fusion products are one important data point. If you think you have been getting somewhere in the 10^20ies of D-D fusion reactions per pulse and you can not find the fusion products to match that estimate, you have a serious problem!
I must disagree, EV's still don't make sense.
And why do you think that? Because that statement doesn't make sense
As a model Y owner I think ICE cars don't make sense.
The idea of going to a gas station and paying $50 per week more than the cost of electricity,
Is it true you have to take an ICE car and have the oil changes twice a year and pay another $50
Is it true you have to get your brakes changed every 30,000 miles?
Is it true that the fuel you put in your car is one of the main causes of war that over the last 100 years and those wars have killed hundreds of thousands of people?
is it true that millions of barrels of oil have been spilled into the ocean?
Scam. Look at the equation - now look for neutron shields around. This thing is one big scam.
It is not.
@@elmarmoelzer2229 your title?
@@erererx3 ??
What a load of horseshit.